Smoke or fire in anti-Gillard campaign?; Vic Labor reveals jobs plan; New research centre for Vic; Planning Minister has big plans for Werribee

November 22, 2012 , 12:06 PM by Mary Bolling

Mornings host Jon Faine has had it with a long-running media campaign casting aspersions about Julia Gillard and her alleged role in establishing a union slush fund. He lays into the journalists who continue to push the story, and raises doubts about whether information from former unionist Ralph Blewitt is likely to produce any evidence.

Also, Victorian Labor has vowed to reverse many of the State Government's funding cuts to the TAFE sector, if it wins the next election. Opposition Leader Daniel Andrews says the $300 million cuts have paved the way for hundreds of job losses, course cuts and campus closures.

The Opposition has flagged reinstating $170 million in TAFE funding, as part of its broader jobs plan. Mr Andrews says the Government "made a choice to take away from TAFE the funding they need to provide the broad range of services that our kids rely upon and that our economy needs. We're going to make that the first call on the budget surplus, if we're returned to government in 2015."

In big news for Victoria, a $185 million revamp of the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute will be unveiled today. The redevelopment has doubled the floor space in the facility, with an extra 270 researchers employed to continue research. Director Professor Doug Hilton tells Jon it's the culmination of years of planning and building, and should enable more breakthroughs. "You don't want to rest on your laurels, So the new building gives us an opportunity to deepen our talent pool."

And after 9am, Jon's joined by Victoria Planning Minister Matthew Guy, who's promoting a plan for a new housing development in Werribee. He also takes on talkback callers who say fringe developments need better service and public transport provisions. Mr Guy says as land sells in the development, money will come in for public transport. He hits back at the Opposition's criticisms, "I hear the Opposition whingeing about their jobs
plans, then they oppose millions of dollars of development."

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John Faine- you don't get it- Ralph Blewitt never said he did nothing wrong! There's no story here. Families fight- it happens. He just says he wants to come clean and tell the truth! You have come across as being someone who really doesn't know what's going on sorry.

You really are a sad case Jon with your absolute Lbor bias.
You have hardly researched this AWU issue yet jump to the inevitable conclusion that gillard hasn't done/ can't do any wrong.
Most of your assertions are completely wrong.
First, Gillard's / Slater & Gordon's client was the AWU not their employees Wilson and Blewitt. She did not act in the best and honest interest of her client by setting up (as Bill Shorten said ) an un-authorised, unappropriate, out of bounds account without her client knowing.
Also, you stated that you couldn't find rthe tape of the call from Blewitt's sister to Paul Murray.
Well for your info. It has been on Michael Smith's Blog and also on Andrew Bolt's Blog since the day it occurred back in August.
Smith's integrity leaves yours for dead.
If you actually did you homework you would understand why the PM is cooked and probably a few close cronies as well.

How dare, you rude arrogant man. How dare you say that people in WA don't care about illegal entrants? We care about the 1,000 people drowned at sea because of the failed policies of the ALP/Greens. You leftist lot don't care about those who've drowned.

Dear Jon
Your true political colours were laid bare this morning with your spirited defense of your favourite PM and her old employer.You refuse to countenance the fact that there may be a case of fraud to answer in the AWU and that our PM may just have allegedly been a party to it.

I nearly drove off the road when you slandered Ralph Blewitt using hearsay evidence from his "sister". How tested was this evidence? You were only too willing to convict Mr Blewitt without any word from him or giving him right of reply.

But let us take another tack Sir, lets assume that Mr Blewitt does have an "interesting" past and in many ways I think he does in deed admit some dubious behavior especially when it has to to with the AWU affair. This only makes the PM's past relationships MORE interesting as Blewitt was a close colleague of Bruce Wilson and Bruce Wilson was the PM's live in partner.

Are you saying the PM had nothing to do with Blewitt in those days? Are you saying that a PM of a country consorting with "crooks" ( your words Mr Faine, not mine) does not matter? She was in a personal relationship with Wilson , very personal indeed and Blewitt was very much a third wheel in the whole time they were together. Her relationship with Wilson and Blewitt shows at best an extreme lack of judgement which a partner in such an august firm as Slater and Gordon should have known not to become involved. "Young and Naive" is not a credible defense in court last time I checked

Also I am sure that the Law Society was most impressed when you said "lawyers regularly organise their clients' affairs to get around the law". This just reinforced most peoples' view that lawyers are almost pond scum. Is that how you practiced law Mr Faine?

Jon who? Never heard of you so I won't be listening to anything you have to say. It is obvious you lean to the left. If you can't see the truth when it is right under your nose I don't think anyone will give a hoot what you think about Gillard and her dysfunctional government.

Michael Smith wants a right of reply Jon Faine! What are you afraid of? He may actually know more than you? I think if you have had a go at Mr Smith it's pretty cowardice not to give him a right of reply!

Why is the ABC continuing to ignore or refusing to report into Julia Gillard and her involvement with the AWU "slush" fund.Calling it an annoyance or non issue doesn't cut it anymore .There is a lot of "documented evidence" out there now that at minimum calls into question the prime ministers behavior as a lawyer and at worst could lead to criminal prosecution .Not once has she called into question the veracity of these documents .The ABC needs to do it's job properly to either disprove it as a fabrication or at minimum ask more questions.Malfeasance from either party has to be investigated.

My tax pays for the ABC and that segment was full of half truths and misleading, I am disgusted that the ABC has in my eyes been a Labor cheer squad, I will put formal complaints to the press council and to my local state rep.
Faine is a embarrassment to this nation for the ABC to hire him is a gross injustice to us all, I and many others don't even listen to or watch the Pathetic ABC, but this Faine episode is gone to far, do you even have a conscience, his blatant lies should be apologised for and corrected, you sicken me and most Australians, hope it gets sold of and a unbiased National broadcaster with not one of this pathetic lot amongst them.

Jon please get your rose colored glasses off. Gillard needs to clear the air with a mountain of allegations. She admits setting up a slush fund that ended up being a major fraud against the awu. Her boyfriend did the fraud. Please see this without bias. Doubt this will be published.

All State budget cuts are due o our Stade going almost bankrupts from the massive debt that Labor left us with. And what do we have to show for this massive waste of money? Nothing but nearly 40 years of paying off things we did not need.

I was shocked at what was said about Michael Smith. I think it only fair that he is given the right of reply, as he has asked. If Faine truly believes what he has said about Julia Gillard's involvement in the AWU scandal, and also about Michael Smith then there should be no reason for him not to give Michael the opportunity to discuss the matter. Waiting to see if Faine has the courage of his convictions.

Remarkable that the best the entire pack of attack dogs can come up with is an utterly innocuous letter from a bank about mortgage insurance given the vast amount of energy they have devoted to the process & the direct access to, and involvement of, the main players.

If this story had ever really had any legs it would have been obvious years ago. This is simply pot boiling journalistic muckraking of the worst kind, run by a bunch of people who clearly are not really interested in the truth - just in keeping their dead duck of a non-existent "scandal" flying.

Ever wondered Jon, why noone has ever been charged for this massive fraud? Because ppl like Shorten & Conroy who are in the current Gillard cabinet campaigned for Bob Kernohan against Wilson in 1992, because of his corrupt ways, are now playing ignorant. Imagine if rapist of murderer used the defence 'awww i did it 17 years ago so it doesn't matter'. Would Catholic church get away with similar argument too?
As for your point when debating talk back caller when you said something along lines of 'you don't need power of attorney doco', c'mon, surely you're not that 'willfully blind'. So what, i could manage someone's wealthy estate without either their consent or that of their next of kin? Wouldn't i get ahead quick. I'm sure there are plenty of laws out there to prevent such misuse of powers of attorney.

I am wondering if Jon is supporting his fellow presenters at the ABC and supporting Hamas firing over 1900 rockets into Israel and condemning Israel for firing defence rockets to blow up the Hamas rockets.
It must be a tough decision for Jon; be loved or despised by your co-workers or be loved or despised by your extended family.

In regards to your audio from yesterday's segment here are a few points i would like to take up from your narrative regarding AWU scandal:
1) You quoted Ralph's Blewitt's younger sister that 'Gillard didn't take the money' followed by 'I am estranged from my brother & we don't talk'. Funny how she is interested to talk with Paul Murray though. Penny said 'Ralph is rotten to the core'. Of course he was, he said that himself, so why was Gillard hanging around ex b/f Wilson & his crony Blewitt in the first place?
2) You managed to give lawyers an even worse name if that is possible. 'Since when should a client (sic - lawyer) not act for someone because they might be breaking the law' 'A lot of the time you're asked to make something legal that if done another way...is illegal'. You said in narrative she set up a slush fund but failed to mention Bill Shorten himself saying the account was 'unauthorised' 'out of bounds' 'inappropriate' and 'illegal'. So making the illegal legal in that sense is aiding and abetting a fraud & is, just quietly, rather unethical & unprofessional. Not to mention an offense.
3)You said if Gillard went to police to dob in Wilson it would be unethical breach of duty to her client and breach of confidentiality. Never mind Gillard setting up unauthorised slush fund misusing AWU name, when the real AWU was her client. No breach of duty to client there i guess.
Also what was she doing acting for her boyfriend covertly putting herself in conflict of interest situation with actual AWU and why did AWU feel the need to take their business elsewhere (to Maurice Blackburn) when they found out about slush fund?
4) You said it is alleged files are missing but files are now turning up in registry of Fed court and elsewhere. What is the 'elsewhere' you speak of? Surely not the State Registry Office in WA where file is still missing? Nope. You speak of Slater & Gordon. 'Files are destroyed after 7 or 8 years' you say. Sure such law came in during 2004, but there requires authorisation from client(s) to destroy files and there's obviously other reasons they weren't destroyed according to 7 year rule because manging director Andrew Grech said last month the files were 'lost, misplaced, i simply don't know'. He could've simply pointed out the 7 year rule, but for some reason felt the need to say they were lost.
These are simply diversionary distractions in an attempt to try & throw people off however it's all on the public record.
At end of the day, Julie Bishop is more than happy to answer any specific questions about any case she's been involved in during her 20 years as lawyer, when she was attacked about her CSR case, so the same standard should apply to Gillard as well regarding the AWU scandal.
Btw given Bishop has court transcripts to answer to in regards to her legal career, there's nothing stopping you from inviting her on your program and taking her up on her offer of transparency which Gillard continues to evade.

I have no reason to listen to your left loving views before today. Wow!!!!! how biased your views are. You are without doubt the most rude radio host I have ever heard. I hope your employer issues apology to both Mr Smith and Mr Baker, they deserve it, as does your audience.

I don't condone having my taxes paid to pay your wages so that you can express your biased views in such a manner. If you wish to do so, create your own blog in your own time and do it that way.

Never have I seen such blatant abuse of the PUBLICLY FUNDED broadcaster, I an absolutely offended that my tax is paying for your misleading baseless rant about the AWU scandal yes scandal, if I wanted your pinion I would ask, your duty is to tell to story BOTH sides not just yours and J Gillard's misleading dribble, check the documented facts, then apologise to all the ABC listeners for your unfounded rant then do the Honourable thing and resign, you have no credibility.

Very disappointed John by your blatant journalistic bias on the AWU story. This story has gone way beyond the point where a serious investigative reporter can reasonably dismiss the case as ranting 'birthers' or right wing trogs. I'm an ardent Labour and union supporter. I believe passionately in the light on the hill. But I think the issues in the AWU case go right to the heart of what's wrong institutionally with the Australian Labor Party.

Judging from your comments this morning, I don't expect this comment to get a public airing but I do urge you (as a listener who has had nothing but respect for you for so many years) to consider the veracity of the categorical denial by Julia Gillard that she knew about the mortgage obtained by Wilson (in Blewitt's name) on the Kerr St property. She flatly denied last night in her statement that she had any recollection of her having any role in organising the mortgage for Wilson's blatantly fraudulent purchase. OK...consider this:

If Ms Gillard truly had no role in the mortgage then how is it that other documents in the publicly available conveyancing file clearly show what she has said cannot possibly be true - sourced to those documents. Not only is there the document referred to on last night's Seven Thirty Report (which records her involvement - albeit denied by her), there is also a file note on the file recording how Julia also asked for a memo on what higher interest rates would be charged on that mortgage if the mortgagee breached certain clauses. Ms Gillard asked for it in writing..and obtained the detail from her then PA.

This is significant because it proves - definitively - that Ms Gillard is not telling the truth about her supposed lack of knowledge of the mortgage at the time. She clearly knew about the mortgage and she directed the letter not to the registered owner (Blewitt) but to the real beneficiary, Bruce Wilson.

Your disgraceful attempt to use a character attack on Blewitt to discredit his evidence to Police does you no service. What you don't seem to understand is that Blewitt admits he's a crook - his sister's allegation is not something he disputes. He admits it. Now he's decided to make a clean breast of it.

You are a disgrace to your profession.
I will not be listening to you again.

Jon, you do your profession a great disservice. You are rude to the idividuals you interview, if they don't hold the same views as you, and in the case of this morning warn them that there is limited time and then proceed to fill the time with your own voice. You are worse than the shock jocks you disparage and contribute nothing to your cause. I was in two minds on this subject before listening to your shrill and illogical posturing this morning.

You gave it your best shot it seems and now I am convinced. Gillard is in trouble.

you have nothing much to say at the best of times but you should be very very careful to voice your opinion on this sordid AWU scandal. As you quite rightfully stated whether you are uninformed or you a a brick. You are both a uninformed brick. The point here is that a person with a severe character flaw is running as PM. This person should be above reproach in case you did not know that. Check the facts and sit with Michael Smith if he has the grace to do so after you treated him this morning and make yourself knowledgeable.
The whole of the ABC is a bloody disgrace!!
Australians care about honesty and decency to make a point!

Jon, Jon, Jon. Socrates would turn in his grave if he listened to your interviews with Smith and Baker this morning. This is a complex matter. Give me your best shot you've got 30 seconds is commercial radio stuff.

Jon, you are "Like the eunuch at the orgy who was always first with the gossip, but being forced to realize that he doesn’t really know what’s going on, his knowledge is not real and that far from being the centre of things, he is forever on the margin".

Umm I don't recall blewitt saying I'm innocent, in fact he said he was part of it and was a crook, don't see how his sister saying oh he's a crook changes anything. After all it is the documentary evidence that speaks volumes! As for gillard saying I didn't recall the piece of paper, maybe she doesn't, but you would remember clearly handling a mortgage, insurance and conveyancing on a house for your boyfriend. Why would papers be sent to Julia if everything was handled by someone else without her knowledge? Would the paralegal not ask to have it faxed to her and attentioned to her name, otherwise the fax would go to Julia and then she would have to find it or chase it up. After all the commonwealth bank wouldn't just pull a name out of nowhere to send it to would they? And where is this paralegal? Couldn't she come forward and confirm guillards story if it's true?
Oh and only one lot of missing files has been found the others are still missing, and slater and Gordon confirmed before the seven years was up for their destroyal the papers were already gone.
As a lawyer acting for your boyfriend and representing the AWU wouldn't you make sure you crossed the t and dotted the i's just in case anything was questioned? Most lawyers would be extra careful in the circumstances

Jon Faine, you really need to get a good dose of reality. Please get yourself educated before putting forth your own personal opinions as if they are fact!!!! You really are a piece of work. Just to let you know that millions of Australians are not happy with this PM and feel that she does have a lot of answers to give us and also to the parliament.

Gotta remember too, the ABC tries to appeal to all points of view. There's always going to be the anti-Gillard audience & the pro-Gillard audience. If ABC ran all their segments in support of one point of view or the other, they will miss out attracting a wider audience.
Have no idea if Faine really believes in Gillard's point of view over AWU slush fund or not, perhaps he does, but after seeing his curious arguments such as lawyers being approached to make something illegal as legal, thinking there's an element of clever devil's advocacy going on. I mean, it's not as if comments criticising Faine isn't going up on this blog? Far to the contrary. He's getting a fair walloping on here & ABC don't mind one bit.

You just don't want to know do you? If Gillard had committed murder you wouldnt want to know about it. If its old news being only 17 yrs old, why did you get excited about Tony Abbott allegedly punching a wall over thirty five years ago.
If the shoe was on the other foot, that is if there was a whiff of scandal about Tony Abbott, you'd be screaming blue murder. You bias is there for all to see. I'm looking forward to hearing your reaction when she is finally exposed. In case you hadn't noticed, the police are now investigating. I suppose you think they're nut jobs as well.

Not only didnt Jon Faine want to listen to anything about Julia Gillard doing something wrong, and tried to rush and hurry Micheal Smith and Mark Baker..... he tried the usual Labor smear to accuse Julie Bishop of doing something wrong. Sounded exactly like listening to a labor politician responding to questions on this issue. Guess thats why you work of the AlpBC, which is seems most of Australia cant bear to watch and listen to anymore.

[quote]Ms Gillard later described the AWU Workplace Reform Association as a “slush fund” for the re-election of union officials. She has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, saying she knew nothing of the operations of the fund.[/quote]
How can you honestly say that, after vouching for the " bona fides" of an entity and doing the paperwork, filling in the forms and filing them with the relevant authorities ,that you then don't know about its operation. My business involves project management of development applications for construction and property subdivision and I organise all the required applications for approvals. Whilst I don't personally sign the forms,I fill them out and back them up with the required
explanatory reports and notes. I may not be involved in the funding of the projects, I certainly know how the final product will work.
Gillard knew the AWU/WRA was being used as a slush fund for
the re-election of union officials when she vouched that it was a entity to promote workplace safety. The AWU was her client- she knowingly and willingly allowed the union (AWU) to be used in its title without doing a due diligence check to see if it was OK to use the unions name.Why? Either she was totally incompetent or she deliberately concealed it for possible fraudulent reasons.I can't believe the a law firm such as Slater and Gordon would give a partnership to such an incompetent lawyer.
If the AWU knew of its existence, they would have oversight of its operations and Wilson couldn't use it to launder extorted monies.
Even though Gillard maintains her ignorance of the operation of
the fund and she didn't knowingly benefit from it, I don't believe her.
The fund was deliberately set up to defraud for personal gain using the AWU in its name to deliberately give it legitimacy. Gillard was a key participator in creating that perception.The way it was set up -using the AWU in its title (unbeknownst to the AWU), the use of a solicitor from a recognised "Labor"law firm (unbeknownst to the S and G), all gave its formation legitimacy, which, in turn, enabled its operation as it did.
She denies knowledge of its eventual purpose. I believe she's being deceptive in this claim?
After all, she does have previous form in the honesty stakes.

Does Faine understand the difference between EVIDENCE and HERE SAY? His attempt to discredit Blewitt by (conveniently being without an audio reference) reading from an alleged transcript from someone claiming to be Ralph Blewitt's sister??? and claiming that Ralph is a crook and shouldn't be trusted was THE lowest inclusion of disgusting muck-raking from a Gillard-lover we have seen to date. EVERY time another piece of evidence paints Gillard as more of a liar than we could have believed before. Who was this woman? Where is the audio file? How was this woman verified as Blewitt's sister? Does Faine ACTUALLY believe this to be a credible "piece of the puzzle" (his own words) and EVERY other piece of CREDIBLE evidence provided (and dismissed by Gillard - LOL) an IN-credible??? How is Faine still broadcasting after this?! Faine has just painted himself as an ALP/Gillard protection front and has demonstrated that he will invent ANYTHING in order to keep Gillard and Co in their current position.

Faine is now no more credible than Gillard and should now be held accountable for interfering with a Vic Police investigation unless he comes forward and provides the contact details for this alleged "sister" of Ralph Blewitt! Faine is now in some seriously deep sh*t!

@Rod Hagen: If this was all "muck-raking" for a "story that has no legs" then why has Blewitt testified to Vic Police that the POA signed by himself (to keep his job under Wilson) was nEVER witnessed by Gillard until a week later?!. That simple little piece of evidence alone is enough to put Gillard behind bars, and if he'd have testified this to police in the 90s, would've prevented AU and the AU people to have EVER been burdended by the communist dictatorship that the ALP has foisted upon the AU people today. But hey, I guess all we have to do is wait for Gillard's truthful response about where she was when Blewitt signed it, won't we. Unfortunately it 1) won't be in Parliament because Gillard doesn't want to be gaoled for lying under oath and 2) she will have "forgotten" the incident so as to not cross her lies anymore than she already has. All Gillard has to do is stay silent and let the documentation and evidence speak for itself, and then AU can get the election they so desperately require sooner rather than later :)

Wilson was not her client and never paid a bill, the Australian Workers Union was the client. Wilson was an employee of the Union. Since when would a solicitor not report a fraud by an employee to the client or Police.
Your smarter than that Jon, either you have not done any research into the facts of what happened, or you are covering for Gillard, why?

Of course Blewitt's a crook John - he was hanging around with Wilson who was certainly a crook, acting as his bagman. So we have to evaluate carefully what he says. As someone involved in a variety of criminal scheme he will probably endeavour to minimise his own wrongdoing.

But then again what does that make Julia Gillard (and hw do we evaluate her story?)? She was sleeping with Wilson and acting for him.

by George Jon you have copped a bagging. Deservedly so. Blind prejudice has led to the downfall of many scientists. Equally many politicians. And now we can include journalists and pseudo journalists such as yourself masquerading as independent commentators - a claim that must now be seriously questioned. I was. an avid listener for years until your bias got too much for me. So sad.

A very sad performance from Jon Faine this morning but at least he showed his true colors and has left no doubts as to where his political loyalties lie. His behavior was on a par with the worst of the shock jocks he is so scathing about.

Personally I think there should be a royal commission into the unions. How could this sort of behaviour not go unpunished for all these years? Look at what is happening with Craig Thomson and Michael Williams. Everything possible is being done to protect these crooks. The AWU story won't go away. The sacking of a couple of journalists will now only fuel the anger of the press mob who now have enough factual information to start asking questions that cannot be answered without incrimination.

I was surprised to hear Alan Jones on ABC 774 yesterday eulogising his opionions to a Melbourne audience. I believe that 774 has a lot to learn from 702BL (Sydney doesn't put up with this AJ shock jock bias on the ABC - hence the revolving door of morning presenters who attempted to do this), and RN. Please learn from Fran Kelly, Phil Adams, and Richard Glover. More humility, less arrogance, and less agression thanks. The news is not meant to be about Alan Jones...or you!

The simple facts are that there was massive fraud involving Gillard's boyfriend and this fraud couldn't have occurred without the assistance, knowing or unknowing of Gillard. Gillard's role cannot at this time be fully known, but it resulted in her being moved on from the law firm. On the face of it John, it may be a good idea for you to thoroughly analyse the available evidence and put it to a smell test. We are all born with an instinct that detects rot when it exists and that is especially the case for journalists. When journalists become activists to protect the interests of wrongdoers, the proper function of our democracy is under threat. If you are satisfied with the PM's answers regarding this matter so far, I suggest you remove the blindfold, ear plugs and nasal mask.

I can't recall any of the above mentioned tweeters being critical of Tony Abbott after he failed to criticise Allan Jones when first asked for a comment about Jones' disgusting comments about Gillard's father's death. It took a respectful comment from Malcolm Turnbull being critical about Jones before Abbott finally issued a critical comment. John Faine is a truly unbiased commentator who is critical of both sides of politics and I am a regular listener.

That means YOU are paid by me and millions of other Australians who like to hear some reporting from you that is not tainted by your own personal views

If you don't know the facts, LISTEN.

Do not talk over people. I want to hear the story from the man who knows a whole lot more than you
You are a disgrace and a formal complaint will be made. ABC has a charter and you have clearly breached it

Jon, you come over as a complete ignoramus, and you're supposed to have been a lawyer! What an idiot you are not to see something is fishy in the AWU scandal. Julia Gillard has again proved, if nothing else, that she has always made errors of judgement, in becoming embroiled with known fraudsters Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt.
This is a long litany of bad judgements this woman has made and she would have to be the worst Prime Minister of the worst government ever, and this is from a former Labor voter, who will never ever vote for them again.
Angela